Nuclear tension rises on divided Korean peninsula

Nuclear tension rises on divided Korean peninsula

Bantarto Bandoro, Editor, 'The Indonesian Quarterly',
Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS),
Jakarta, bandoro@csis.or.id

A frightening scenario on the divided Korean peninsula cast a
shadow over the world, as North Korea continued to resist
pressures from the United States and its Asian allies that it put
a complete halt to its nuclear program. North Korea has announced
that it is pulling out of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons treaty, possibly paving the way for the secretive state
to begin mass-producing nuclear weapons.

The announcement means that under international law, there is
nothing to prevent North Korea from re-activating a controversial
nuclear plant at Yongbyon and producing materials for nuclear
weapons. Whether the North Korean leaders will persist in their
policy actually depends on how the world, especially the United
States, reacts.

Why is North Korea raising the stakes now, when the world is
campaigning to eliminate nuclear weapons from the world's
arsenals? It is difficult to tell, because Pyongyang and its
mercurial leader Kim Jong-il act in erratic and contradictory
ways. It seems possible that North Korea is using its nuclear
issue as a hard-line ploy to negotiate a non-aggression pact and
improved economic aid with the United States.

The paranoid North Korea may have also decided that the United
States intends to attack it anyway and has thus decided to ready
its defense while the United States is preoccupied with Iraq. The
danger of a nuclear war on the divided peninsula is perhaps also
due to the "criminal" policy of the United States towards North
Korea, a policy that has fueled the nationalist sentiment of the
North Koreans.

Thus, the strategy game on the Korean peninsula is not only
being played out between the United States and North Korea, but
also between the world and North Korea, assuming that the issue
is raised to the Security Council. But it is the same old game
that had occupied the minds of the world community previously,
who worried that the continuation of sanctions on North Korea by
the United States would lead them to initiate a full-scale war.

The United States' Asian allies, such as Japan and South
Korea, are also part of the game. These two countries face the
possibility of heightened security risks if North Korea develops
its nuclear arsenal unchecked. Both Japan and South Korea had put
forward proposals that the United States be more prudent in its
measures against Pyongyang.

One of these was a proposal that the North give up its nuclear
weapons ambitions in exchange for the United States' promising to
resume its shipments of fuel oil, to support the country until
its energy problems were solved. This might also include a pledge
from the United States not to attack North Korea. Although the
conditions of this proposal fall short of the non-aggression pact
North Korea demands, it might meet the need of North Koreans in
terms of providing reassurances for their future.

The United States, for one, is unlikely to compromise on this,
given its current stand towards the regime in Pyongyang. It is
assumed that the U.S. position is that the ball is in the North
Koreans' court. Thus, the nuclear standoff between North Korea
and the U.S. will continue indefinitely.

Although North Korea's nuclear program may really be a
diplomatic gambit designed to extract economic and political
concessions, no one can really ascertain the North's true
intentions; and if it decided to build a nuclear stockpile as the
U.S. alleges, then a more a dangerous confrontation on the Korean
peninsula would be unavoidable.

If this is the case, there are very good reasons for the
international community to be worried. Arms proliferation does
matter, especially when such weapons of mass destruction fall
into the hands of secretive and unpredictable regimes which may
well be heading to a catastrophic failure. Experts believe that
the North Korean system is in terminal decline, and its people
suffer great poverty and recurring famines. How the regime
concludes matters and manages this potential crisis is made
harder if it has nuclear weapons. There is also the danger that
an unstable regime could provide such weaponry to third parties.
Facts indicate that North Korea already has a bad track-record in
the proliferation of missile technology.

The ongoing nuclear crisis would certainly have negative
impacts on the stability and security of the Asian region as a
whole. Indonesia regretted the heated situation in East Asia
following North Korea's decision to pull out of the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty, and made calls on the country and its
bickering U.S. counterpart to end the standoff amicably.
Indonesia's position is that the region be freed from nuclear
confrontation. This is the kind of response that Indonesia and
perhaps other members of ASEAN could also show, to express their
apprehension of the possible effects of the dangerous ongoing
trend on the peninsula.

Unlike Southeast Asia, East Asia lacks a regional organization
that could be relied upon to solve regional conflicts. Bilateral
mechanisms will be the main option in bringing regional conflicts
to an end. It is assumed that the U.S.-North Korea nuclear crisis
will be solved through such a mechanism, but international
pressure on the involved countries is still necessary if the
crisis is to be solved peacefully.

The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) may have a chance to offer its
thoughts on how the crisis could be resolved peacefully, given
the fact that North Korea and the United States are both members
of the forum. Perhaps it is through such a framework that ASEAN
could take its best diplomatic shot to help find a solution.
Though an ARF emergency meeting to discuss the crisis might not
be a rational option at this moment, the current nuclear crisis
should teach the forum that in future, the forum should include
high-risk political issues, such as the current crisis, into its
regional agenda.

There are always opportunities for Asia-Pacific regional
organizations such as the ARF to play a key role in helping to
solve whatever crises might arise in the future. Given ARF's
current performance record, however, many doubt that countries,
particularly the "major" ones, will use the forum to discuss
issues.

No one really knows when the nuclear crisis on the Korean
peninsula will come to an end, considering the fact that both the
U.S. and North Korea have not moved from their current positions.

The longer the crisis continues, the greater the threat to
regional security, especially if other countries decide that they
also need nuclear weapons to counter the North Korean threat.